writing

How I Write #6: The Editing

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)

All right, so where are we in this extended discussion of how I write my books?  We just covered how I edit my wordspew and it’s time to talk editing.

After revising and revising and revising, my book is eventually “good enough” to be edited. By good enough I usually mean a mix of “this is good” and “oh god I’m sick of this, I’m gonna stop now.”  The latter is usually more prominent than I’d like, but anyway I’m at least at a stopping point.

When I refer to as editing, there’s sort of two kinds I lump under “Editing” because they’re really intertwined.

  • Pre-Readers – People who read the book for content.
  • Editors – The person or person that goes through the book and makes sure it’s got proper grammar, spelling, etc.  They also comment on content.

Before I go into how I do this, there are times I don’t do any editing beyond my own writing. At least in the past. Let’s take a look at that, if only for confessional purposes.

Let me repeat – this is when I don’t have others edit.  I still edit the hell out of my own work, even if poorly.

When You Don’t Use Other People To Edit

So first of all, I don’t think you should avoid having your work edited. If at all possible, someone should at least pre-read it. However there’s a few cases I can see someone not editing, which I’ve done or at least think I did:

  • The work is small, say a 99 cent ebook.
  • No one’s available to edit/pre-read and you want to get something out.
  • You’ve edited it really, really well.
  • The document seems tolerable.
  • You’ve got the kind of document (and knowledge) where the editing is easy.  A small work that’s an organized guide that follows an easily checkable pattern, and one you’ve run spellcheck/grammar check on multiple times is a good instance.

I’ve done two published works this way (and hope to revise them with editors and pre-readers when I can). It can work.

But I don’t recommend it. But hey, I gave you an out, and you can always say “but Steve said.”

Now anyway, on with editing.

Pre-Reading

I didn’t always use pre-readers – originally I only did when a book had a lot of interviews and I used them as pre-readers. In time I found that pre-readers were invaluable for insights.

See, a pre-reader isn’t an editor in the traditional/specific sense and that’s good. A pre-reader is a reader. They are not there to edit a book for language and punctuation, even when they do because they can’t resist. They’re they’re for content and flow.

They’ll catch things an editor won’t because an editor, no matter how much they read, is still editing. You really do need both.  Plus it takes a little pressure off your editor –  “Can you edit my terrible abuses on language and tell me if this meticulous battle scene makes sense?”

Secondly, a good pre-reader thinking as a reader can give you feedback on your book to help it become a better book.  They can tell you how it can be more consistent, better organized, and so on.  In turn it won’t just be a better book – that will make the book a hell of a lot easier on an editor. A book that reads easy, even with flaws, allows an editor to go to town as opposed to being stopped by confusing twists or ill-explained concepts on top of Oxford comma arguments?

How do I handle pre-readers?

  • I pretty much put out a call among people. I’ve started keeping a list of people to send things too now.
  • I give them 1-3 months depending on the size of the work.
  • I integrte feedback as it comes in more or less. For small works I may wait – for larger works i put in the feedback as soon as I get it.

Thats about it. Find, send, wait, integrate.

After the pre-reader feedback I usually do another pass through the book. then it’s off to the editor

The Editor

First of all when you get something edited to publish professionally, make sure they’re professional.

That may not mean they’re a professional editor. It means they have professional-quality skills relevant to what you’re doing. It could be from writing their own novels, it could be editing fanfic for ten years, it could be an experienced technical writer. Just get someone who can edit for what you’re doing.

I like to fansource, finding editors through fandom and geeky connections. They “get” me, I often get a break on price, they get their name on a book they like, I act as a reference, everyone wins.

I usually give an editor 1-3 months depending on the complexity of the work and their schedule. It also gives me a nice break, and sometimes while waiting I do extra formatting or setup for publishing.  Or write another book.

When I get the edited document back, I don’t use that document to make the final book – I read through it, page by page, integrating comments and changes into a new copy master document. That forces me to read and pay attention, and makes sure I don’t end up with a book laden with things I forgot to address, remove, or change.

This part usually takes at least a month. My goal, when it’s done, is to have it done.

The Final Read

So once that editing run is done, I do one more spellcheck and grammar check, and read through the book (yes, again). If I find any errors, I fix them – and run that check again.

At this point, having done so much editing, I use that previous trick of reading parts out of order just to keep myself fresh.

My approach is to read it through.  If anything changes in the small I fix it and re-read that chapter.  If there’s any large change, I re-read the book from the start, or at least skim.  I’m done when I do a pass through and didn’t change anything.

Then it’s one more spelling/grammar check.  Then it’s done

Onward To Publishing

So with the book edited – pre-read and edited properly – and with my final read-through’s its done. Ready to go.

It’s time to publish.

 

– Steve

How I Write #5: The Re-Writing

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)

And let’s get back to How I Write with me, Steve.  Who Writes.  This.  And books.  But also this post.  Er.  Anyway, you get the idea.

So to recap I’ve covered how I write up to the point of actually writing.  It was basically:

  • I get ideas (and keep track of them)
  • I pick ideas to write (based on my plans)
  • I outline a book (at times to the paragraph level)
  • I write (by pretty much spewing writing into said outline until something booklike emerges)

By the time this is done I have a well-outlined book that is written by a mixture of gut, heart, imagination, and desperation.  The outline provided guidance so the book “works” – in that it reaches a goal – but the results are often less than stellar.

In short, my first draft is usually very first and much draft.  It’s often done with surprising speed, but it’s really not that great.  That means my next step is re-writing.

I hesitate to call this editing since my re-writing is not that subtle an exercise.  Sure, I often have content thats in better shape than it sounds when I call it “word vomit”  – but at best it’s not polished, and at worst parts of the content only worked in my head.  So it’s time to go through and re-write it because sometimes it changes massively.

Which isn’t as bad as it sounds.  Usually.

Read more

How I Write #4: The Writing

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)

So lately I’ve been reviewing how I write.  Let’s take a look at where we are:

When I write I usually get a big idea, then I review and record it.  I figure if it’s book worthy if it fits my goals.  Then, I work on an outline (in fact I usually work on that earlier as I’m inspired and want to evaluate the idea).

So how do I write?  I mean I’ve talked about getting up to the point of writing.  So when does it begin and do I actually get stuff done

The above activities set the stage.  I got an idea, I have an outline, I have drive.  All that’s left is basically cut loose.

In short, I kind of vomit onto the page.

Disgusting Metaphors Go!

Actually I’m being a bit facetious.  I have an outline, so it’s not vomiting onto the page, it’s vomiting into a very specific framework that lets the vomit flow into the right form.

I sit down, with my outline, and following the direction it set I start writing.  The Outline provides me enough information to know what to write, and I simply do it.  I rarely take the time to do any editing or revision unless I have to.  My goal is to get from A to B in that outline as best as I’m able, even if it’s kind of crappy, half-assed, or understandable only to me.

(In case you wonder, yes, sometimes I eventually throw things out.  But stick with me – this works)

So what’s the benefit to this?  Quite a bit:

  • * First it’s fast.  I can get  a lot done – and the Outline helps that.
  • * Secondly, it’s visceral.  It’s from the gut, the brain, the feelings, whatever part of me is currently engaged.  It’s near automatic.
  • * Third, it’s disinhibited.  The worst enemy a writer has is often themselves.  I’m too focused to get in my own way doing this.
  • * Fourth, it’s about writing.  My goal is not to do anything but get something done, so I avoid distractions, or hemming and hawing.

Now note that this method doesn’t work as well if you don’t have an Outline.  The Outline gives you a pattern to work with (so you don’t go off the rails) and making it keeps you rethinking your ideas (so they’re more instinctive to write).  Going with no Outline can result in this vomit method getting pretty incoherent.

Pacing Myself

I usually set a pace for me to write – based on the aforementioned Outline – on how much I’ll do within a certain time.  It doesn’t have to be good or coherent, but I cover a certain percent of an outline within a given time.

I usually block out the major tasks of my book in terms of months, and set writing goals by weeks.  This way I have the large outline of the book (done in X months) and specific, actionable goals (get 15% through the Outline in a week).

I need this pacing not just to set goals, but because the outline and the “vomit method” actually mean I can overdo it.  I’ve had huge writing binges of hours where the words are coming out, and after awhile I’m exhausted.  I have trouble remembering writing parts of “Cosplay, Costuming, and Careers” as I was at my desk for hours.  Well I think I was.

You can too easily burn yourself out doing this – and because the goal is to “get it done” you might not realize it’s happening.  A 10% decline in quality when you’re using the vomit method isn’t apparent, and you won’t notice you’re real tired until your quality is much, much worse, or the words just stop.  Setting the goals helps this . . . but you might just go a bit farther.

So I pace myself, but I’ve never found a perfect method.  Mostly it’s a mix of gut,pre-set deadlines, and guesswork.

That may explain a few things.

It’s OK To Change

Now even though I go and just vomit onto the page, I do occasionally revise the Outline itself.

At times (less and less as I go on) you may find that things didn’t quite work out the way you expected.  It’s OK to revise your outline if you realize things need to be restructured.  However I’d do that as a separate task or after taking a nice break from “vomit writing.”

I also have found that in a few cases of writing you have to write in detail to know just what order things should be within your outline.  You may, say, know when events happen in a chapter, but only later discover the order you tell them in may need to be done differently.  Sometimes orders aren’t even apparent until you start writing – which is fine (and has been something I’ve done deliberately because I had to read over a lot of research and it was easier to find a pattern while reviewing it and writing about it).

Moving On

So then I’ve got a book that’s really a fast-written dump of ideas into a reasonably planned outline.  It’s barely a book at all.

Which is why, after I finish up all that writing, it’s time to go editing.  That’s when a book starts to become a book.

  • Steve